These medieval twats cant help showing their true colours, if they say these things publicly what else are they going to implement if, more likely when, they gain more power in the U.K. The left wing press wont be firing up their outrage bus thats for sure.

Tofu-munchers, and I looked at this thinking that it would be about cookery!

Having said that, let me start by saying that I am a huge opponent of sharia as law on two reasons, firstly that it reflects the vision of only SOME people of how life should be lived and that they have no right to impose it on others who differ. Secondly it has no place in Britain's cultural heritage. If some people wish for their lives to be guided by those disciplines then good luck to them, but it has no place in mine nor should it.

That said I wonder how much of the article is jazzed up for shock effect. The man did say that rape as such doesn't occur within marriage, by which I imagine he is trying to say that it is different to forcing yourself on a non-consenting person with whom you have not had sexual relations before. 'Maybe aggression, maybe indecent activity... Because when they got married, the understanding was that sexual intercourse was part of the marriage, so there cannot be anything against sex in marriage.
'Of course, if it happened without her desire, that is no good, that is not desirable.' He did qualify it by saying that agression may occur, and that if it happens without her consent that is not desirable.
Those last comments seem to me to be saying that forcing yourself on your wife is not right, but he is arguing about the semantics not the fact.
He also held forth about using rape as an excuse for divorce which may actually be a valid point.
Finally he talked about disciplining a husband who is found guilty of aggression, which seems positive to me, I seem to recall other muslim leaders who wouldn't go that far.

He does come across as fairly hardliner, but in this case I think the article is as much to blame as he is, the comments he made give a fair basis for further discussion.

And according to this type of people it's OK to cut of your wifes nose and ears if she runs away, aside from the fact she was promised at 12 and sent to live with him at 14 makes them a bunch of paedos too

Given that they have yet to have a Muslim enlightenment as we did in the eighteenth century. Given that they do have three hundred years of legal and social development to catch up on(not sure if the enlightenment has reached the RGJ yet) then we can hardly expect modern concepts like rights, votes and equality for women to be part of their agenda just yet.

Given that they have yet to have a Muslim enlightenment as we did in the eighteenth century. Given that they do have three hundred years of legal and social development to catch up on(not sure if the enlightenment has reached the RGJ yet) then we can hardly expect modern concepts like rights, votes and equality for women to be part of their agenda just yet.

Click to expand...

Fair comment. You beat me to it about the year we outlawed spousal rape.

And according to this type of people it's OK to cut of your wifes nose and ears if she runs away, aside from the fact she was promised at 12 and sent to live with him at 14 makes them a bunch of paedos too

On what grounds? British law? Not that long ago we were marrying girls of that age off to cement alliances and what not.

As mentioned by GW, in UK we only made it illegal to rape your wife in the 90's before that there was no such act as raping your wife.

Having said that, the nutter making such quotes now a days needs ejecting from the country. We have no place for such backwards fcuktards. He should go to some stoneage country where they are just as backwards as he.

Given that they have yet to have a Muslim enlightenment as we did in the eighteenth century. Given that they do have three hundred years of legal and social development to catch up on(not sure if the enlightenment has reached the RGJ yet) then we can hardly expect modern concepts like rights, votes and equality for women to be part of their agenda just yet.

Click to expand...

I was wondering how long it was going to take for somebody to remember that it was only 1,990 years before we got the message that rape within marriage is wrong,let´s see If they can stop stoning before we stopped burning witches,we might have to wait two or three hundred years but I suppose we didn´t have the advantage of being invaded to have our beliefs stuffed down their throats.